SHANTI SARUP Vs. STATE U T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS , namely Shanti Sarup and Balbir Singh were convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Magistrate to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default of payment of fine, they were further ordered to undergo R.I. for three months under Section 61(1)(a) of the Punjab Excise Act. However, in appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, maintained their conviction, but reduced the sentence of imprisonment from two years to one year R.I. The sentence of fine alongwith the default clause was also maintained by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

(2.) ON the last date of hearing, notice regarding sentence was issued.

(3.) MR . S.C. Goel, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners in this case are labourers who were allegedly engaged by the licencee for the transport of country made liquor. He had applied for a permit which he could not get in time. The offence is only technical one. I think it is a fit case where the petitioners be given the benefit of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, I suspend their sentence of imprisonment as also of fine. They were directed to be released on probation of good conduct on their entering into a bond of Rs. 2000 each with one surety in the like amount for a period of one year, to the satisfaction of the trial Court undertaking to keep peace and be of good behaviour and to appear in the Court to receive the sentence during the said period whenever called upon to do so.